Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by endymi0n 2393 days ago
I used to be pro-nuclear as well, but I‘m not anymore. If you look at fully externalized cost including the consequences of uranium mining and storage of isotopes, renewables plus storage are close to breaking even.

Except that even the minimum reactor size (for technical, security and proliferation reasons) mandates extremely large investment in terms of capital and space, which in turn leads to ownership by large intransparent conglomerates, bickering by NIMBYs, clearances, costly audits and years of planning and validation.

Renewables plus storage on the other hand just get cheaper by automation and are relatively affordable. Any larger company can afford cash and space for solar on the roof plus a PowerPack in the backyard.

Knowledge and learning rate for that track advances at an order of magnitude faster rate than for fission or fusion.

In terms of scaling up as quickly as needed, nuclear is dead in the water.

1 comments

We are closing in or have hit peak renewable in several states and countries around the world. Unless we figure out a massive improvement to battery technology renewables are not going to help us in the same way they been.
[citation needed]

Wind power is continuously upgrading due to more possibilities opening with higher turbines, as well as old sites being upgraded.

Offshore wind is just getting profitable without subsidies, it's just getting started.

Solar is fitting in anywhere and with still falling prices will get ever more cost competitive even at low insulation sites.

Storage technology is just getting started as well with many investments from the past 5-10 years now reaching maturity (low-cobalt, silicon, solid state, fuel cells...)

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd be curious as to your sources.